Top 25 talk

[sac]

Just (some of) the facts.

Please don't quote me and then change the words Pat..........I think I've seen you admonish others for doing that to you. Thanks.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

It's been fun league to follow from afar this year.

I agree Q, I've enjoyed following it and even had all 4 CCIW livestat games up on the monitor Saturday night.


But the 'bigger picture' and Dave puts it is, this is not the first time the CCIW teams have been dealt with differently in the poll this year, nor will it probably be the last.

Like I said, just the facts.

sac - I believe what I showed was that the CCIW teams are not being dealth with differently in the poll. They got the same treatment as Amherst and WPI who both lost considerable number of points after a week with a loss. Now, they certainly got treated better than St. Norbert who had a horrid week, but that had to be expected.

Your example doesn't make that point since you chose to ignore how many points the teams were docked and instead concentrated only on the number of slots they fell. Again... look at the entire picture and not just the "facts" you chose to look at.

[sac]

It's been fun league to follow from afar this year.

I agree Q, I've enjoyed following it and even had all 4 CCIW livestat games up on the monitor Saturday night.


But the 'bigger picture' and Dave puts it is, this is not the first time the CCIW teams have been dealt with differently in the poll this year, nor will it probably be the last.

Like I said, just the facts.

sac - I believe what I showed was that the CCIW teams are not being dealth with differently in the poll. They got the same treatment as Amherst and WPI who both lost considerable number of points after a week with a loss. Now, they certainly got treated better than St. Norbert who had a horrid week, but that had to be expected.

Your example doesn't make that point since you chose to ignore how many points the teams were docked and instead concentrated only on the number of slots they fell. Again... look at the entire picture and not just the "facts" you chose to look at.

Bigger picture Dave.

[Gregory Sager]

It's been a fun league to follow from afar this year...but it would be more fun if my team was not starting 3 sophomores and 2 freshmen.  Not the right year to try to get away with that!  I may try to attend as many CCIW commencements as possible this May, personally seeing to it that the CCIW Class of 2009 takes a hike.

I echo Bob, especially since my team is just as young, and is injury-plagued to boot. But the flip side of the CCIW's standout class of 2009 is the fact that the CCIW class of 2010 is exceptionally weak. Next season the CCIW will be dominated by juniors and sophomores, which means that in 2009-10 the CCIW won't have that gaudy collective 71-17 non-conference record and we'll be less likely to get a weekly manifesto from sac or OxyBob about Top 25 pollsters making excessive allowances for CCIW teams that lose.

[Mr. Ypsi]

It's been a fun league to follow from afar this year...but it would be more fun if my team was not starting 3 sophomores and 2 freshmen.  Not the right year to try to get away with that!  I may try to attend as many CCIW commencements as possible this May, personally seeing to it that the CCIW Class of 2009 takes a hike.

I echo Bob, especially since my team is just as young, and is injury-plagued to boot. But the flip side of the CCIW's standout class of 2009 is the fact that the CCIW class of 2010 is exceptionally weak. Next season the CCIW will be dominated by juniors and sophomores, which means that in 2009-10 the CCIW won't have that gaudy collective 71-17 non-conference record and we'll be less likely to get a weekly manifesto from sac or OxyBob about Top 25 pollsters making excessive allowances for CCIW teams that lose.

Yeah, but 2010-11 may drive them completely over the edge!

[Pat Coleman]

Just (some of) the facts.

Please don't quote me and then change the words Pat..........I think I've seen you admonish others for doing that to you. Thanks.

I bolded my changes just like others do.

I can see you're trying to be funny but honestly, you presented such a slanted view of the "facts" that it can't go unchallenged.

[sac]

Just (some of) the facts.

Please don't quote me and then change the words Pat..........I think I've seen you admonish others for doing that to you. Thanks.

I bolded my changes just like others do.

I can see you're trying to be funny but honestly, you presented such a slanted view of the "facts" that it can't go unchallenged.

actually I wasn't trying to be funny, just polite.

you presented such a slanted view of the "facts" that it can't go unchallenged.

there's some irony there hope you can see it.

[Titan Q]

All conferences go through cycles -- cycles that are directly related to the quality of the players from season to season.  The really good years are typically the ones with talented and deep senior classes, or with incredible young talent.  The "down" years usually come when the league, collectively, is young.

The CCIW is regarded as one of D3's top 3 leagues.  Like other top leagues, when the CCIW goes through one of those really good seasons, it can have 3-4 legitimate Top 25-caliber teams. 

For example, 2005-06:

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/06/final.htm

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (9-5 CCIW, went to Final Four)
#11 Augustana (11-3, won CCIW regular season title)
#19 North Central (9-5, won conference tournament)
RV Elmhurst (9-5 CCIW)

The games played between these 4 teams, except I believe one, all came down to the final seconds.  They were dead-even.  IWU "validated" the strength of this group by getting to Salem.  The league featured some outstanding talent that season, led by seniors Rick Harrigan, M.O.P. (Augustana), Adam Dauksas (IWU), Keelan Amelianovich (IWU), Chris Martin (Elmhurst).  Junior Anthony Simmons (North Central) was oustanding as well.

http://www.cciw.org/winter_bball_m/05_06_MBBallconf.htm


2000-01 also comes to mind...

http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/01/final.htm

#3 Illinois Wesleyan (10-4 CCIW, Final Four)
#5 Carthage (11-3 CCIW, Elite Eight)
#9 Elmhurst (12-2 CCIW, won regular season title, Sweet 16)
RV Augustana (9-5 CCIW)

Again, some big-time players leading the way on these teams: senior Ryan Knuppel, M.O.P. (Elmhurst), junior Jason Wiertel (Carthage), soph. Rob Garnes (Carthage), soph Antoine McDaniel (Carthage), and soph. Luke Kasten (IWU).  Several young guys who were special talents.

http://www.cciw.org/winter_bball_m/2001allconference.php



After two seasons where the CCIW really only had 2 Top 25-caliber teams (2006-07 final poll - Augustana #11, Elmhurst #16...2007-08 final poll - Augustana #5, Wheaton #11), 2008-09 is one those very strong years at the top again (and this year strong top to bottom).  Wheaton, Augustana, and Elmhurst are legitimate Top-25 caliber teams, and in my opinion, any of the 3 have the talent to get to Salem.  Augustana starts 4 seniors...Elmhurst has seniors Brent Ruch and Ryan Burks...Wheaton has seniors Kent Raymond and Andy Wiele. 

Next year those guys graduate and the cycle will continue.

[Gregory Sager]

The CCIW is regarded as one of D3's top 3 leagues.  Like other top leagues, when the CCIW goes through one of those really good seasons, it can have 3-4 legitimate Top 25-caliber teams. 

For example, 2005-06

That wasn't a "really good" CCIW season, though, at least not in the sense that 2000-01 and this season are really good CCIW seasons. In 2005-06, the CCIW was an extremely top-heavy circuit. As Bob said, the top four teams were outstanding. But the bottom four was quite poor by CCIW second-division standards. Wheaton (11-14) and Carthage (10-15) were significantly below par in terms of typical fifth- and sixth-place CCIW finishers. Millikin (10-15) was about as good as you'd expect a normal CCIW seventh-place team to be, but NPU (4-21) was absolutely wretched.

What makes a conference strong or not strong is how it measures from top to bottom.

[sac]

Confusion on the new poll..........are we talking this year or all time?  Are we including old gyms no longer used?

[ziggy]

Confusion on the new poll..........are we talking this year or all time?  Are we including old gyms no longer used?

I included hope and calvin old and new, as well as the salem civic center.  I apologize if this was cheating.

[Greek Tragedy]

all-time, and I guess you can use the old and new gyms of a school.

Scrimmages and exibitions don't count.  Salem Civic Center works fine. 

[David Collinge]

How about D3 vs. non-D3 at a non-D3 site?

[Greek Tragedy]

Any gym to see a D3 men's game...at least one D3 team had to be playing...yeah.

[David Collinge]

I'm interested in what the top score in this game will be.  I know it won't be mine, but it's a respectable figure that can serve as a good start for Can You Top This?

To the best of my recollection, I make my count 28, which excludes exhibitions and venues where I've only seen women's games.
Albion -- Augustana -- Baldwin-Wallace -- Caltech -- Calvin (old) -- Capital -- Case Western Reserve (old) -- Case Western Reserve (new) -- Denison -- Hanover -- Hiram -- Illinois Wesleyan -- Kenyon (old) -- Kenyon (new) -- Mt. Vernon Nazarene -- Muskingum  -- Oberlin -- Occidental -- Ohio Northern -- Ohio Wesleyan -- Otterbein -- Salem Civic Center -- Savannah Civic Center -- St. John Fisher -- Washington U. in St. Louis -- Westmont -- Wittenberg -- Wooster

P.S. For those with long institutional memories: yes, it is no mistake, I've never been to Rhodes.